Ozge Tokmak,
Omer Berk Berkalp
Jelka Gersak
Faculty of Textile Technologies and Design,
Textile Engineering Department,
Istanbul Technical University
Istanbul, Turkey
Faculty of Textile Technologies and Design,
Textile Engineering Department,
Istanbul Technical University
Istanbul, Turkey
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
Department of Textile Materials and Design,
University of Maribor
Maribor, Slovenia
n Introduction
Investigation of the Mechanics and
Performance of Woven Fabrics Using
Objective Evaluation Techniques.
Part I: The Relationship Between FAST,
KES-F and Cusick’s Drape-Meter Parameters
Abstract
In this study, mechanical and performance analyses of woven fabrics were carried out
using objective evaluation techniques. The KES-FB Auto system, the FAST system and Cusick’s Drape Meter were used to evaluate the mechanical properties of the fabrics. The
shear, bending, extension, and compression parameters were measured using KES-FB and
FAST instruments, and the drape coefficient was measured using Cusick’s Drape Meter. It
was found that the KES-F and FAST systems have a good correlation between each parameter, although they use different measurement principles. Another conclusion obtained from
this work concerns the dependence of bending and shear parameters on the fabric drape
property. It was found that the drape of a fabric is primarily dependent on the fabric’s bending and shear properties.
Key words: objective evaluation systems, fabric handle, fabric mechanics, KES-F, FAST.
is also known that fabric handle is related
to many characteristics including flexibility, stiffness, compressibility, resilience, extensibility, the surface contour,
mass per square meter, surface friction
and thermal characteristics [3]. On the
other hand, the quality, tailorability and
performance characteristics of a fabric
are related to its mechanical properties in
a low stress region, as well as its surface
and dimensional properties. These properties are tensile, shear, bending, compression, surface friction, hygral expansion and relaxation.
At present, the performance of fabric
quality related to mechanical comfort is
evaluated by a subjective method called
handle judgement. This assessment is
made by fabric experts touching the fabric. Fabric handle is defined as the overall
aesthetic quality of the fabric perceived
[1], which influences consumer priorities
and their sense of the usefulness of the
product, as well as the marketability of
the fabric for retailers. Subjective evaluation of handle has always been used as
the fundamental aspect of communication for the development, production,
quality control, specification and marketing of textile materials and garments before the development of objective measurement technology for fabric.
As far as traditionally used textile materials are concerned, the comfort of the aesthetic and psychological sense of apparel
fabric is an important criterion. The comfort sense of a fabric has various kinds of
properties and cannot be determined according to one simple physical parameter.
Fabric handle is commonly used to determine the comfort of textile materials.
The complex concept of fabric handle
may be analysed as the interaction between simple attributes of fabric quality
such as firmness, fullness, crispness and
hardness, smoothness or sleekness [2]. It
Major research into the relationship between the mechanical properties of fabric and fabric handle was first conducted
by Pierce [4] in 1930. His article “The
Handle of Cloth as a Measurable Qual-
Objective evaluation is described as the
evaluation of the fabric handle, quality
and related fabric properties that can be
defined as objective properties of the fabric. The basic aim of this measurement is
to determine the quantity of the end-use
properties of the apparel and fabrics desired.
ity” was the first research on the relation
between fabric mechanics and fabric
handle. The handle of a fabric was investigated and then converted into numerical values. In the 1970’s, S. Kawabata
and M. Niwa [5 - 9] started to study fabric mechanics and handle in Japan. They
aimed to build a model of the relationship between fabric mechanics and fabric
handle. A research committee -The Hand
Evaluation and Standardisation Committee (HESC)- was then established in
1972 under the leadership of Mr. S. Kawabata, sponsored by the Textile and Machinery Society of Japan. The research
on objective evaluation of fabric handle
was accelerated by the foundation of this
committee. Efforts of the HESC to seek
an objective evaluation of fabric quality
and handle, as well as constant studies
on the mechanical properties of fabrics
in Japan, enabled Kawabata to design the
‘Kawabata Evaluation System for Fabrics’ (KES-F) [10]. He defined this work
as a need for quick and reproducible instrumentation for evaluating fabric handle. In 1973, the first KES-F instruments
were introduced to the industry.
These instruments were:
KES-F1: Tensile and Shear Tester
KES-F2: Bending Tester
KES-F3: Compression Tester
KES-F4: Surface-friction and Geometrical roughness Tester
A total of 16 parameters can be obtained
from this system.
Tokmak O., Berkalp O. B., Gersak J.; Investigation of the Mechanics and Performance of Woven Fabrics Using Objective Evaluation Techniques.
Part I: The Relationship Between Fast, Kes-F and Cusick’s Drape-Meter Parameters. FIBRES & TEXTILES in Eastern Europe 2010, Vol. 18, No. 2 (79) pp. 55-59.
55
Table 1. Fabric properties.
Fabric
No.
1
2
3
4
5
Material
11
12
%100 wool
%100 wool
%100 wool
%100 wool
%100 wool
%80 wool %8 polyamid
%8 polyester %4 elastan
%88 wool %8 polyamid
%4 elastan
%88 wool %8 polyamid
%4 elastan
%54 polyester %44 wool
%2 elastan
%54 polyester %44 wool
%2 elastan
%55 polyester %45 wool
%55 polyester %45 wool
13
%50 polyester %50 wool
6
7
8
9
10
20
%40 wool %45 polyester
%15 linen
%40 wool %45 polyester
%15 linen
%80 wool %20 polyester
%75 wool %25 mohair
%55 polyester %45 wool
%54 polyester %44 wool
%2 elastan
%50 polyester %50 wool
21
%50 polyester %50 wool
14
15
16
17
18
19
Yarn Count, Nm Twist t.p.m. - Linear Density, gr/m
Warp
Weft
77/2 - 811 - 0.026 78/2 - 812 - 0.026
72/2 - 678 - 0.028 38/1 - 706 - 0.026
78/2 - 815 - 0.026 78/2 - 833 - 0.026
80/2 - 813 - 0.025 80/2 - 821 - 0.025
70/2 - 710 - 0.029 37/1 - 760 - 0.027
Weave design
Weight,
g/cm2
2/1 twill
2/1 twill
plain
plain
plain
165
165
145
140
160
72/2 - 718 - 0.028
72/2 - 741 - 0.028
plain
170
72/2 - 795 - 0.028
72/2 - 742 - 0.028
72/2 - 782 - 0.028
72/2 - 753 - 0.028
plain
2/2 basket and
180
66/4 - 520 - 0.030
66/4 - 474 - 0.030
2/2 filling rib
260
80/2 - 854 - 0.025
80/2 - 837 - 0.025
2/1 twill
210
100/2 - 934 - 0.020 100/2 - 917 - 0.02
2/1 twill
160
82/2 - 900 - 0.024
80/2 - 814 - 0.025
56/2 - 690 - 0.036
70/2 - 750 - 0.029
56/2 - 600 - 0.036
80/2 - 880 - 0.025
80/2 - 891 - 0.025
82/2 - 851 - 0.024
56/2 - 670 - 0.036
70/2 - 736 - 0.029
56/2 - 698 - 0.036
80/2 - 891 - 0.025
2/1 twill
3/1(+2 -1)twill
2-2/2-5(+3)twill
plain
165
165
320
155
54/2 - 680 - 0.037
57/2 - 663 - 0.035
4/4 basket
200
16/1 - 541 - 0.063
76/2 - 837 - 0.026
80/2 - 912 - 0.025
16/1 - 534 - 0.063
38/1 - 765 - 0.026
80/2 - 850 - 0.025
2/1 twill
plain
2/1 twill
250
140
170
80/2 - 867 - 0.025 80/2 - 806 - 0.025
2/1 twill
185
46/2 - 602 - 0.043
46/2 - 612 - 0.043
2/2 twill
295
67/2 - 866 - 0.030
65/2 - 875 - 0.031
2/1 twill
205
Table 2. Results of tightness factors, the cover factor and weave factor.
Tightness
56
FAST consists of three instruments and a
test method to measure, in particular, the
properties of wool and wool-blend fabrics related to their making-up properties, as well as the tailoring performance
and appearance of tailored garments during wear.
The instruments of the FAST system are;
FAST-1: Compression Meter
FAST-2: Bending Meter
FAST-3: Extensibility meter
FAST-4: It is a test method to measure dimensional stability: relaxation shrinkage
and the hygral expansion of fabrics.
Using the FAST system, 14 parameters
can be measured and calculated.
The aim of this study was to analyse the
mechanical and performance characteristics of wool and wool-blended fabrics
using both of the objective evaluation
systems, and to search for a reliable relationship between the physical and mechanical properties of the fabrics.
Weave factor Fabric
No.
Russell
Galuszynski
Seyam and El-Shiekh
Cover
factor
Warp
Weft
1
0.727
0.686
0.696
0.687
1.500
1.500
2
0.887
0.816
0.849
0.779
1.500
1.500
3
0.756
0.696
0.756
0.614
1.000
1.000
4
0.737
0.678
0.737
0.602
1.000
1.000
5
0.918
0.824
0.918
0.705
1.000
1.000
6
0.777
0.714
0.777
0.625
1.000
1.000
7
0.799
0.735
0.799
0.640
1.000
1.000
8
0.746
0.679
0.709
0.710
2.000
1.250
9
0.745
0.683
0.694
0.686
1.500
1.500
10
0.685
0.645
0.655
0.656
1.500
1.500
11
0.700
0.660
0.670
0.667
1.500
1.500
12
0.690
0.650
0.655
0.675
1.714
1.500
13
0.948
0.909
0.902
0.993
2.750
1.830
14
0.727
0.669
0.727
0.594
1.000
1.000
15
0.584
0.524
0.509
0.716
4.000
4.000
16
0.855
0.806
0.818
0.736
1.500
1.500
17
0.931
0.831
0.931
0.708
1.000
1.000
18
0.677
0.638
0.648
0.649
1.500
1.500
19
0.713
0.672
0.682
0.679
1.500
1.500
20
0.846
0.792
0.786
0.812
2.000
2.000
21
0.785
0.740
0.751
0.725
1.500
1.500
FAST (Fabric assurance by simple testing) was later developed by CSIRO
(Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific
and Industrial Research Organisation)
as an alternative to the KES-F system to
provide the industry with a simple, ro-
finishing, the evaluation of new technologies (spinning system, finishing machinery), and in buying control for garment
makers.
bust, relatively inexpensive system for
objective measurement of the mechanical properties of fabrics. It is mainly used
by manufacturers, finishers and garment
makers. The FAST system can be used in
fabric development, the optimisation of
n Materials and methods
Twenty one wool (100%) and wool blended woven suiting fabrics, with a fineness
which varied from 19.5 to 21.5 micron,
were used in this study. The properties of
the fabrics used in this study are shown
in Table 1. The weave tightness, defined
as the ratio of the cloth construction parameters to the corresponding parameters of the reference fabric, the cover
factor, which is a number derived from
the number of warp (or weft) threads per
unit length and the linear density of the
yarns, indicating the extent to which the
area of a woven fabric is covered by warp
(or weft) yarns, and the weave factor,
which is defined as the ratio of the thread
amount to the interlacing amount, were
calculated. The tightness factors were
calculated according to Galuszynski
[15], Russell [16], Seyam and El-Shiekh
[16, 17]. Results of the tightness factors,
cover factors and weave factors are given
in Table 2. The KES-FB Auto and FAST
systems were used to evaluate mechanical properties of the fabrics: the extension, bending rigidity, and shear rigidity.
The fabric drape (drape coefficient) was
measured using Cusick’s Drape meter
(Table 3).
FIBRES & TEXTILES in Eastern Europe 2010, Vol. 18, No. 2 (79)
Table 3. Results of mechanical properties evaluated by FAST, KES-FB and the drape coefficient (evaluated by Cusick’s Drape meter).
Fabric
type
KES-FB test results
FAST test results
Bending rigidity
B, cN.cm²/cm
01
2,74
0,059
0,090
0,94
2,60
5,45
0,090
46
0,394
02
2,89
0,068
0,098
0,91
2,55
6,45
0,108
44
0,391
03
2,98
0,046
0,033
1,10
3,05
3,95
0,042
55
0,385
04
3,50
0,046
0,044
1,16
3,50
4,05
0,040
57
0,339
05
6,00
0,057
0,060
0,81
6,20
4,80
0,056
37
0,365
06
8,48
0,044
0,054
0,74
8,70
4,30
0,070
30
0,339
07
9,09
0,050
0,042
1,11
9,30
3,95
0,047
43
0,341
08
9,23
0,086
0,056
1,74
8,50
6,70
0,066
60
0,400
09
12,80
0,057
0,118
0,98
13,85
5,70
0,090
36
0,404
10
7,08
0,036
0,109
0,91
7,55
4,10
0,092
44
0,409
11
1,99
0,051
0,073
0,91
2,05
3,85
0,068
39
0,383
12
2,13
0,048
0,059
1,01
2,10
4,55
0,064
43
0,360
13
1,54
0,244
0,126
1,65
1, 00
15,70
0,095
79
0,529
14
2,22
0,064
0,114
1,04
2,45
6,45
0,104
50
0,511
15
1,87
0,088
0,176
0,50
1,90
7,55
0,152
19
0,478
16
4,27
0,162
0,231
1,51
3,60
11,15
0,203
66
0,509
17
3,24
0,052
0,043
0,97
3,35
4,25
0,045
46
0,427
18
2,97
0,045
0,078
0,67
3,45
3,80
0,057
29
0,342
19
8,16
0,056
0,185
0,98
8,45
5,30
0,162
35
0,449
20
2,29
0,246
0,279
3,14
1,75
36,05
0,218
738
0,748
21
2,08
0,097
0,113
1,73
1,85
9,70
0,110
82
0,497
n Results and discussion
Comparison of FAST and
KES-FB parameters
The first step of this study was to compare
the two objective evaluation systems. As
shown in Figure 1, the correlation between FAST and KES-FB values was as
high as expected. The correlation coefficients between the two systems were
found to be 0.93 for the shear parameter,
0.98 for the compression parameter, 0.99
for the extension parameter and 0.88
for the bending parameter. These values
show that FAST and KES-F instruments
measure similar values, although they
use different measurement principles. As
also shown in literature [11, 12], the values show a similarity between previous
studies and the present one. Consequently, both the FAST and KES-FB instruments can be used effectively to measure
the mechanical properties of fabrics.
Shear
rigidity G,
cN/cm.deg
Drape test
results
Extension
EM, %
Compression
energy WC,
cN.cm/cm²
Extension
E100, %
Bending
Rigidity B,
μN.m
Compression
surface thickness
ST, mm
Shear G,
N/m
and shear properties that are the most important, which are known as the primary
dependent properties for fabric drape. In
view of this it was decided to correlate
the drape coefficient with the bending
and shear properties from both systems
(FAST and KES-F) to validate the correlation of these parameters.
The correlation between the drape coefficient, FAST bending and shear properties was high, as can be seen in Figure 2.
Drape
coefficient
According to Figure 2 (see page 58), the
correlation coefficients are 0.91 between
the drape ratio and FAST bending parameter, and 0.80 between the drape ratio
and FAST shear parameter. The correlation between the drape ratio and bending
is higher than the shear, which is a sign
that the bending property is more related
to the drape property than the shear.
The correlation between the drape ratio,
KES-F bending and shear properties is
Comparison of the drape coefficient,
bending and shear properties
Drape is the term used to describe the
way a fabric hangs under its own weight.
It has an important role in how good a
garment looks in use. The draping behaviour required from a fabric will differ
widely depending on its end-use. Drape
is a very complex attribute of a fabric
and is dependent on most of the physical and mechanical properties of a fabric;
however, of all of them, it is the bending
FIBRES & TEXTILES in Eastern Europe 2010, Vol. 18, No. 2 (79)
Figure 1. Comparison of KES-FB and FAST parameters.
57
Drape = Kb×0.866 + Ks×0.602×10-1 +
(1)
+ 0.288 (r = 0.862)
Drape = Kb×1.059 + Ks×0.604×10-1 +
- Tg×0.251 + 0.452 (r = 0.883) (2)
Drape = Kb×0.940 + Ks×0.625 +
- Ts×0.170 + 0.407 (r = 0.879) (3)
Drape = Fb×0.948×10-2 +
(4)
Fs×0.812×10-4 + 0.357 (r = 0.824)
Figure 2. Comparison between the drape coefficient and FAST bending and shear values.
Drape = Fb×1.145×10-3 +
- Fs×0.324×10-4 + Tg×0.181 +
+ 0.223 (r = 0.838)
(5)
Drape = Fb×1.039×10-3 +
+ Fs×0.345×10-4 + Ts×0.066×10-1 + (6)
+ 0.306 (r = 0.827)
where;
Kb - KES-F bending value
Ks - KES-F shear value
Fb - FAST bending value
Fs - FAST shear value
Tg - Tightness of Galuszynski
Ts - Tightness of Seyam
Figure 3. Comparison between the drape ratio, KES-F bending and shear values.
n Conclusions
In this research, the mechanical properties of wool and wool blended fabric were
measured using objective evaluation systems. The relationship between the KESFB and FAST systems and that between
the drape ratio and the bending and shear
properties measured by the FAST and
KES-FB systems were investigated. The
following conclusions can be drawn from
the findings of these investigations:
It was found that the KES-FB and FAST
systems have a good correlation between
each parameter, although they use different measurement principles.
Figure 4. Relationship between the bending and shear Properties measured and the FAST,
KES-FB and drape coefficients.
also high, as shown in Figure 3. According to Figure 3, the correlation coefficients are 0.83 between the drape ratio
and KES-F bending parameter, and 0.79
between the drape ratio and KES-F shear
parameter.
The correlation coefficients are very
similar for both comparisons of the drape
with FAST and KES-F bending and shear
parameters. It is once again shown that
the fabric drape property is mostly related to fabric shear and bending properties.
On the other hand, drape is a very complex attribute and is not only dependent
on bending and shear parameters but also
on other properties of fabrics; however,
58
their effects are not as high as the bending and shear, which is why the correlation coefficients are nowhere near 100%.
Chen [13] also studied drape in which
the drape coefficient was correlated with
mechanical properties, and a correlation
was found within the range of 60 to 95
percent for ten fabric samples. In the
present study, the correlations found are
in the same range as the literature.
In the study, the drape ratio is also expressed by bending and shear properties,
with both the FAST and KES-FB results
and the tightness factor of Seyam and
Galuszynski. The multi regression formulas derived are shown below:
A high correlation was obtained between
drape-shear and drape-bending parameters. It is once again seen that these are
the primary parameters that effect drape.
According to the statistical analyses, a
high correlation was also obtained between multi regression models of drapeshear-bending and the additional tightness factor. The coefficients in the models were also found to be significant.
Since the textile industry is still searching for a reliable method to end discussions between fabric manufactures and
consumers over quality, it seems that objective evaluation systems like KES-FB
and FAST will continue to be used and
will have an important role in the future
as today.
FIBRES & TEXTILES in Eastern Europe 2010, Vol. 18, No. 2 (79)
References
1. Kim J. O., Lewis Slaten, B.; Objective
Evaluation of Fabric Hand: Part 1. Relationship of Fabric Hand by the Extraction
Method and Related Physical and Surface Properties, Text. Res. J., 69, No. 1,
(1999) pp. 59-57
2. Postle R.; Fabric Objective Measurement
Technology, Int. J. of Cloth. Sci. and
Tech., 2, 3/4 (1991).
3. Tyler D. J.; 1991. Materials Management
in Clothing Production, BSP Professional
Books, pp. 35-40.
4. Pierce F. T.; ‘The Handle’ of Cloth as a
Measurable Quality, J. Text. Inst., 21,
T377 (1930).
5. Kawabata S., Niwa M.; Objective Measurement of Fabric Mechanical Property
and Quality: Its Application to Textile and
Clothing Manufacture, Int. J. of Cloth. Sci.
and Tech., 3, (1991) pp. 7-18.
6. Kawabata S., Niwa M.; Fabric Performance in Clothing and Clothing Manufacture, J.Text. Inst., 80, No. 1 (1989).
7. Kawabata S., Niwa M.; High Quality
Fabrics for Garments, Int. J. of Sci. and
Tech., 6, (1994) pp. 20-25.
8. Kawabata S., Ito K., Niwa M.; Tailoring
Process Control, J. Text. Inst., 83, No.3
(1992).
9. Matsudaira M., Kawabata S., Niwa M.;
The Effect of Fibre Crimp on Fabric
Quality, J. Text. Inst., 75, No.4, (1984)
pp. 273-277.
10. Bishop D. P.; Fabrics: Sensory and Mechanical Properties, Textile Progress,
Vol. 26, No. 3 (1996).
11. Barndt H., Fortess F., Wiener M., Furniss
J. C.; The Use of KES and FAST Instruments: In Predicting Processability of
Fabrics in Sewing, Int. J. of Cloth. Sci.
and Tech., 2, 3/4, (1990) pp. 34-39.
12. Ly N.G., Tester D. H., Buckenham P.,
Roczniok A. F., Adriaansen A. l., Scaysbrook F., De-Jong S.; Simple Instruments
for Quality Control by Finishers and Tailors, Text. Res. J., 61, No. 7, (1991) pp.
402-406.
13. Chen B., Govindoraj M.; A Parametric
Study of Fabric Drape, Text. Res. J., 66,
No. 1, (1996) pp. 17-24.
14. Geršak J.; Study of relationship between
fabric elastic potential and garment appearance quality, Int. J. of Cloth. Sci. and
Tech., 16, No. 1/2, (2004) pp. 238-251.
15. Galuszynski S.; Fabric Tightness: A
Coefficient to Indicate Fabric Structure,
J.Text.Inst., 72, (1981) pp. 44-49.
16. Seyam A. M.; Structural Design of Woven
Fabrics, The Textile Institute, 66, No.3
(2002).
17. Seyam A., Aly El-Shiekh; Mechanics of
Woven Fabrics Part III: Critical Review
of Weavability Limit Studies; Text.Res.J.,
63, (1993) pp. 371-378.
Received 09.06.2008
,
Instytut Biopolimerów i Włókien Chemicznych
Institute of Biopolymers and Chemical Fibres
Multifilament Chitosan Yarn
The Institute of Bioploymers and Chemical Fibres is in
possession of the know- how and equipment to start the
production of continuous chitosan fibres on an extended
lab scale. The Institute is highly experienced in the wet
– spinning of polysaccharides, especially chitosan.
The Fibres from Natural Polymers department, run
by Dr Dariusz Wawro, has elaborated a proprietary
environmently-friendly method of producing continuous
chitosan fibres with bobbins wound on in a form suitable
for textile processing and medical application.
Multifilament chitosan yarn
We are ready, in cooperation with our customers, to
conduct investigations aimed at the preparation of
staple and continuous chitosan fibres tailored to specific
needs in preparing non-woven and knit fabrics.
We presently offer a number of chitosan yarns with
a variety of mechanical properties, and with single
filaments in the range of 3.0 to 6.0 dtex.
The fibres offer new potential uses in medical products
like dressing, implants and cell growth media.
Instytut Biopolimerów i Włókien Chemicznych
ul. Skłodowskiej-Curie 19/27; 90-570 Łódź, Poland;
Phone: (48-42) 638-03-02, Fax: (48-42) 637-65-01
E-mail: ibwch@ibwch.lodz.pl http://www.ibwch.lodz.pl
Reviewed 07.09.2009
FIBRES & TEXTILES in Eastern Europe 2010, Vol. 18, No. 2 (79)
59